#digital privacy

The Madhya Pradesh High Court grants anticipatory bail to an accused who shared intimate photos of a former partner, ruling that circulation alone does not disqualify bail - provided the accused undertakes to delete all copies and cease further dissemination. This sets a critical precedent for digital privacy rights in consensual relationship disputes under the new BNSS framework, balancing victim protection with presumption of innocence.

The Supreme Court upheld conviction under Section 506 IPC for threatening to upload a woman’s private video, holding that digital exposure to impute unchastity qualifies as criminal intimidation. The ruling expands the scope of 'unchastity' under IPC to include modern forms of digital harassment, reinforcing protections for women’s dignity and privacy.

The Chhattisgarh High Court ruled that Section 67A of the IT Act requires concrete evidence of intentional transmission or viral circulation of intimate content-not just prior consensual exchange-to sustain a criminal charge. This sets a critical precedent for digital privacy cases, shielding individuals from prosecution based on unsubstantiated allegations of sharing private material.

MP High Court grants bail in a case involving sharing of intimate photographs, holding that consent and adult agency negate automatic denial of bail under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. The ruling emphasizes that pre-trial detention is unjustified where the prosecutrix was a consenting party, reinforcing bail as a rule under Article 21.